"Quick" question

[Ted]

I watched an Armchair General video on you tube.

There was an assault across a field where everyone used the "quick" command with several way points and pauses at each.

My question is if a squad comes under fire during one of the pauses at a way point and starts to return fire, will it end movement until it is safe to move again (that is not under fire) or start the next quick movement order at the end of the pause period automatically even under fire.

[Sublime]

Pretty sure once the pause is over they'll start running again.

If its a move order they.ll usually begin to start running if they come under fire.

Of course hunt will cancel move orders if they get fired on or spooked. sometimes this can be annoying however, especially in WeGo, because a small burst of fire at someone else will case your men to hit the dirt. This can cause delay after delay, until you getr frustrated and order regular movement types. Of course then, with my luck especially, the enemy has moved and now they open fire and my men should hit the dirt but because of my new quick orders they advance... into gunfire.

[thejetset]

Yeah ... they will start running unless they are suppressed or pinned.

However, the idea is that there is a less likely chance that they will be suppressed because they've just had about 10 seconds to fire at the enemy.

I also implemented this tactic after watching the armchair general review. When this is implemented on platoon level, with all the squads split, there is rarely a chance when the enemy isn't under fire.

This is also a standard RL tactic for advancing under fire and maintaining fire superiority while advancing.

[Michael Emrys]

It's what I do whenever there is any chance of contact with the enemy. An important part of the tactic is to stagger the timing so that there is always at least one team of a squad not moving and able to take any enemy under fire while the others are in motion.

Michael

[sluggo337]

Isn't this use of quick moves with several waypoints the same as Assault move? Does anyone use Assault? If not, why use several quick moves instead?

[thejetset]

"Quick/Pause" has several benefits over Assault:

1) Quick/Pause can be done with only ONE fire team. Whereas the "Assault" command requires at least two fire teams. (one to suppress and one to advance)

2) Quick/pause gives you a lot more control. You can decide how often and where you want your teams to drop and suppress. For instance, if you are advancing on a position that requires more suppression, you can pause more often. If you are advancing on a position that doesn't require as much suppression ... or you need to advance more quickly, you can issue fewer pauses or shorter pauses.

[Cymru]

Pretty sure once the pause is over they'll start running again.

If its a move order they.ll usually begin to start running if they come under fire.

Of course hunt will cancel move orders if they get fired on or spooked. sometimes this can be annoying however, especially in WeGo, because a small burst of fire at someone else will case your men to hit the dirt. This can cause delay after delay, until you getr frustrated and order regular movement types. Of course then, with my luck especially, the enemy has moved and now they open fire and my men should hit the dirt but because of my new quick orders they advance... into gunfire.

Even more annoying, visible artillery fire (even friendly) seems to make Hunt troops end their move.

[Statisoris]

Assault uses FAST moves not QUICK

[Sublime]

Yeah Cymru, even sometimes it seems heavy suppression fire coming from friendlies will stop hunt commands. maybe not though.

As far as the assault command I use it sometimes. Fast with pause works well, but if Im going to enter a building or position near the enemy or certain to be in contact, and I have the men in a squad to do it I order assault.

Of course if you split a squad up it cant assault, sometimes its good, sometimes its not. If I think I can hold the position and the men wont get annihilated, i use assault. If theres a fair chance of the men going up to the wall, into the house, or by the hedge will get wiped out or overwhelemed then split teams are better.

The school of thought advocating split squads is realistic anyways AFAIK, all historical accounts I've read emphasized veterans insisting on everyone spreading out. You definitely will notice a drop in your casualties, ESPECIALLY from explosives, if you spread your men out.

[LukeFF]

My preference (at least with the American side), is to split off an Assault Team once I know contact with the enemy is likely. That way I can provide a good base of fire with the Garands and BAR, while the squad leader charges forward with his SMG in the lead of the assault team. Once the assault team reaches its destination, then the base of fire team bounds forward ahead of the Assault team. This way, one team is always providing cover while the other is maneuvering into position. Especially with a big, heavy gun like the BAR, this works pretty well (you don't really want that type of gun leading an assault).

It's just a shame the American rifle squads typically don't have more than one SMG.

[Erwin]

I have also seen a FAST moving Schreck pause when seeing a tank, and killing it, before continuing to FAST move to its original destination. Lovely when that happens.

[Sublime]

i do the same often luke. try it with paratroopers - the m1919a4 is a way better base of fire weapon than the bar. ( i repeat myself on this every other post i make )

[Bon]

I have also seen a FAST moving Schreck pause when seeing a tank, and killing it, before continuing to FAST move to its original destination. Lovely when that happens.

Saw a bazooka team do that last night- initiated when they spotted a Panther tank through bocage. My pixeltruppen are rarely so accurate.